Chris West

Applying for	Debian Maintainer
Applicant	Chris West <debian@fau.xxx>, currently Debian Contributor
OpenPGP fingerprint	408A E4F1 4EA7 33EF 1265 82C1 B195 E1C4 779B A9B2
Activity timespan	2017-09-11 to 2017-10-31
Status	Closed. RT ticket: #6949
Completed	2017-10-31
Advocate	lamby
Debian account name	faux
Missing requirements	none
Requirements OK	Declaration of intent SC/DFSG/DMUP agreement Advocate Key consistency checks

Requirements

Requirement	Approved by	Approved date	Notes
365: Declaration of intent	nm@debian.org	2017-09-11
365: SC/DFSG/DMUP agreement	nm@debian.org	2017-09-11
365: Advocate	nm@debian.org	2017-09-11
365: Key consistency checks	noodles	2017-09-25

(download all signed statements in a single mailbox file)

Log

Date	Author	Requirement	Action	Content	Public
2017-09-11 13:40	faux	-	-	Process created	yes
2017-09-11 14:08	faux	Declaration of intent	add_statement	Added a new statement	yes
2017-09-11 14:08	nm@debian.org	Declaration of intent	req_approve	New statement received, the requirement seems satisfied	yes
2017-09-11 14:09	faux	SC/DFSG/DMUP agreement	add_statement	Added a new statement	yes
2017-09-11 14:09	nm@debian.org	SC/DFSG/DMUP agreement	req_approve	New statement received, the requirement seems satisfied	yes
2017-09-11 14:41	lamby	Advocate	add_statement	Added a new statement	yes
2017-09-11 14:41	nm@debian.org	Advocate	req_approve	New statement received, the requirement seems satisfied	yes
2017-09-16 12:05	noodles	Key consistency checks	-	While this key technically meets the requirements I'm curious as to why it doesn't have the email address used for the application as a UID, and also about the wisdom of a .xxx domain for a primary email address in terms of systems reliably accepting it?	yes
2017-09-17 20:13	faux	Key consistency checks	-	I am unconcerned about the email address used; [many things]@goeswhere.com, [many things]@fau.xxx are all identical (they all arrive at the same mailbox; they all have exactly the same DNS and mailserver config). This is the main reason I haven't added extra uids to the key, they mostly exist to reduce the clarity of usage of the key. "If you wish to contact me via. gmail, use one. If you wish to contact me otherwise, use the other." (which does not go through a 3rd party). I have had no issues with the .xxx domain being used as a novelty for email, although I have heard rumours (not personally) of corporate networks that block .xxx for websites. I had not considered that this might be an issue for Debian. I will accept a change of account email to gpg, goeswhere.com, if that makes everything easier, but I feel that the loss of clarity is harmful there.	yes
2017-09-25 21:24	noodles	Key consistency checks	req_approve	I'm not worried about the Debian infrastructure (though I can't comment on the email setup there), but email interactions as part of Debian tend to involve non-Debian email systems even when it's between DDs, and I'd worry about the risk that people would treat .xxx as more likely originating spam. Something to be aware of, I feel. I still think that the email address you're planning to use for your primary Debian work should really be on the key, but not enough to hold up approving the keycheck.	yes
2017-10-29 13:31	noodles	-	proc_freeze	Process frozen for review	yes
2017-10-29 13:31	noodles	-	proc_approve	Process approved	yes
2017-10-29 13:31	noodles	-	proc_unapprove	Process unapproved	yes
2017-10-29 13:31	noodles	-	proc_approve	Process approved	yes
2017-10-31 00:40	gwolf	-	done	Closed from keyring changelog a833b77c648cf92caed64b92a4a297d28e2586c4, RT #6949	yes